What if...

[sandraladeda]

Thanks for your response, hotyhat (I love the sound of your name abbreviated, by the way - "Hotty Hat", lol)

You present an interesting scenario, as of course we will never know what might have happened if the Rs had not called 911. However, I would feel more inclined to ponder the what ifs were it not for the fact that the ransom note seems so incredibly fake. I cannot fathom a genuine kidnapper (or indeed, foreign faction) that would pen a long-winded and melodramatic RN such as this.

Do you consider this RN the work of a FF? Or was that part of the note "staged" so to speak? To cover for an assault gone bad?

 

[rashomon]

So the R's could have been victimized even further, had they obeyed the RN and not called 911. Remember the RN emphasized they not call police, even threatening to behead a child.

And the fact that the Ramseys were not bothered about what the ransom note threatened shows that they knew they had nothing to fear from that note. The note said that JB would be 'beheaded' if the Ramseys talked to as much as a stray dog, and what was their reaction to the note? They invited neighbors over to their house, although theoretically the 'kidnappers' could have watched their every move.This is totally damning circumstantial evidence pointing to no one else than the Ramseys themselves.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

And the fact that the Ramseys were not bothered about what the ransom note threatened shows that they knew they had nothing to fear from that note. The note said that JB would be 'beheaded' if the Ramseys talked to as much as a stray dog, and what was their reaction to the note? They invited neighbors over to their house, although theoretically the 'kidnappers' could have watched their every move.This is totally damning circumstantial evidence pointing to no one else than the Ramseys themselves.

From crimelibrary.com:

When the telephone rang, "George Johnson" told Ettelson, "I am sending a Yellow Cab for you. Get in and go to the drugstore at 1465 East Sixty-third Street." Ettelson handed the phone to Jacob and the message was repeated. In the trauma of the events, both men immediately forgot the address of the drugstore.

Applying the same logic, Mr. Franks and Mr. Ettleson should've been suspects in Bobby Franks' murder. I mean, if they truly feared for him, certainly they would have remembered the only detail given to them by the abductor!

 

[rashomon]

From crimelibrary.com:

"When the telephone rang, "George Johnson" told Ettelson, "I am sending a Yellow Cab for you. Get in and go to the drugstore at 1465 East Sixty-third Street." Ettelson handed the phone to Jacob and the message was repeated. In the trauma of the events, both men immediately forgot the address of the drugstore."

Applying the same logic, Mr. Franks and Mr. Ettleson should've been suspects in Bobby Franks' murder. I mean, if they truly feared for him, certainly they would have remembered the only detail given to them by the abductor!

Comparing the Bobby Franks murder to the JB murder is comparing apples to oranges. Bobby Franks was not killed in his own home like JonBenet.

You also can't compare Bobby's father and Mr. Ettleson forgetting the drug store address to the Ramseys forgetting the threat that JonBenet would be beheaded if they talked to as much as a stray dog.
It was the 'abductor' ("George Johnson") who told Mr. Franks what to do.
And Mr. Franks and his lawyer were so distraught that they forgot the address the kidnapper had directed them to.
But before they could even do a thing the phone rang again and Mr. Franks was informed that his son had been found dead.

Compare that to the Ramseys: JonBenet's body hadn't been found yet but they obviously were not in the least disturbed by the specific threats in the ransom note. They called the police and invited their neighbors over.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Comparing the Bobby Franks murder to the JB murder is comparing apples to oranges.

Apples and oranges. OK. Anybody want to point out any similarities they see between these four statements, or their authors?


"Death to Pigs" --Manson family member, writing on the wall in victim's blood.

"You're not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."--JBR Ransom note author.

"Should you, however, disobey any of our instructions, even slightly, his death will be the penalty." - Nathan Leopold

“We blew up Thomas Mosser because he was a Burston- Marsteller executive… Burston- Marsteller is about the biggest organization in the public relations fields. This means that its business is the development of techniques for manipulating people’s attitudes – The Unabomber.” --Ted Kaczynski

 

[Rupert]

Apples and oranges. OK. Anybody want to point out any similarities they see between these four statements, or their authors?


"Death to Pigs" --Manson family member, writing on the wall in victim's blood.

"You're not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."--JBR Ransom note author.

"Should you, however, disobey any of our instructions, even slightly, his death will be the penalty." - Nathan Leopold

“We blew up Thomas Mosser because he was a Burston- Marsteller executive… Burston- Marsteller is about the biggest organization in the public relations fields. This means that its business is the development of techniques for manipulating people’s attitudes – The Unabomber.” --Ted Kaczynski

Gee. I dunno.
Obviously the two Crimes of the Century
also: "follow our instructions to the letter"

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Gee. I dunno.
Obviously the two Crimes of the Century
also: "follow our instructions to the letter"

1. They each considered themselves to be anonymous at the time they wrote their message.
2. Threats to kill is either stated or underlies each message.
3. There is the appearance that victims were somehow 'selected' based on a 'criteria.' As if the author had an agenda, or was on a mission. Pigs, fat cats, attitude manipulators, etc.
4. Brutal, senseless murders are associated with each statement. Murders that could only make sense to the authors at the time of their killing.

IMO the author of JBR's note fits right in with these other 'criminal authors.'

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

In the case of Bobby Franks, his victimization was only one part of their grand 'perfect crime' scheme. Likewise, LaBiancas victimization were only part of Manson's 'master race war plan'. Kaczynski's victimization was just one part of a supposed 'anti-tech conspiracy.'

The RN author in fact hinted at a larger purpose, that JBR was just a part of: 'you're not the only fat cat so don't think that killing will be difficult'.

 

[Nehemiah]

OK Capps, I take your point. It IS very hard to believe. Maybe one day I will be able to convince you. I'll keep trying.

Little point, not enough to convince you I know but never mind - I don't think it was JUST to keep her social standing that Patsy did this. I think it was also to keep it secret from John. I think that if he ever suspected that Patsy had not protected JonBenet there would have been hell to pay. I think Patsy was acutely aware of this and that it might spell the end of her marriage and she would possibly even lose custody of the children. That to Patsy would have been pretty high stakes I would have thought.

Okay...I can understand someone molesting JB and Patsy finding out about it once; I can even understand her not making waves about it that one time. But, something ongoing....and Patsy allowing it, even passively...I can't imagine that.

 

[Nehemiah]

In the case of Bobby Franks, his victimization was only one part of their grand 'perfect crime' scheme. Likewise, LaBiancas victimization were only part of Manson's 'master race war plan'. Kaczynski's victimization was just one part of a supposed 'anti-tech conspiracy.'

The RN author in fact hinted at a larger purpose, that JBR was just a part of: 'you're not the only fat cat so don't think that killing will be difficult'.

Such as an AIM (American Indian Movement) signature crime?http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1336690/posts?q=1&&page=51

 

[sandraladeda]

Such as an AIM (American Indian Movement) signature crime?http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1336690/posts?q=1&&page=51

I can just picture JBR sitting up eating pineapple with an AIM activist/terrorist.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I can just picture JBR sitting up eating pineapple with an AIM activist/terrorist.

Is the fact JBR ate pineapple an indication she had to be with someone, and someone she trusted?

 

[aussiesheila]

Okay...I can understand someone molesting JB and Patsy finding out about it once; I can even understand her not making waves about it that one time. But, something ongoing....and Patsy allowing it, even passively...I can't imagine that.

Nehemiah, thanks for your reply.

I must tell you Nehemiah, this is not something I made up from out of my head. This kind of thing is known to happen. There are documented cases of women who claim to have been sexually abused as children, whose mothers knew about it and did nothing to try to stop it and allowed it to continue.

But perhaps you know all about this. Perhaps you are only arguing that you don't think PATSY would behave like this? If so, why do you think this?

 

[Brefie]

Nehemiah, thanks for your reply.

I must tell you Nehemiah, this is not something I made up from out of my head. This kind of thing is known to happen. There are documented cases of women who claim to have been sexually abused as children, whose mothers knew about it and did nothing to try to stop it and allowed it to continue.

But perhaps you know all about this. Perhaps you are only arguing that you don't think PATSY would behave like this? If so, why do you think this?

aussiesheila, since I have never heard of a mother allowing this with anyone other than her own lover, could please provide a few links? Thanks in advance.

 

[rashomon]

Is the fact JBR ate pineapple an indication she had to be with someone, and someone she trusted?

Patsy for example. Weren't her fingerprints found on the bowl?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Patsy for example. Weren't her fingerprints found on the bowl?

I was looking for the connection between JBR's 'pineapple' and the circumstances under which she ate it. I've read lots of speculation on these circumstances, I was just wondering if any were fact-based.

PR's fingerprints on a bowl in her own house just isn't very remarkable.

 

[aussiesheila]

aussiesheila, since I have never heard of a mother allowing this with anyone other than her own lover, could please provide a few links? Thanks in advance.

Sorry Brefie, no I can't. I read up on this in books years ago and now would have difficulty locating it all again.

 

[BlueCrab]

I was looking for the connection between JBR's 'pineapple' and the circumstances under which she ate it. I've read lots of speculation on these circumstances, I was just wondering if any were fact-based.

PR's fingerprints on a bowl in her own house just isn't very remarkable.

Holdontoyourhat,

Correct. Patsy's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple should be expected since she would have been the one who removed the bowl from the dishwasher and put the clean bowl away in the kitchen cabinet.

The only other fingerprints on the bowl were Burke's. Therefore, it was likely Burke who removed the bowl from the cabinet and spooned the pineapple into it. JonBenet snacked from the bowl about one hour before she died. This indicates that Burke and JonBenet were probably secretly downstairs together in the middle of the night.

The bowl of pineapple was left out all night on the breakfast room table and taken into evidence that morning and frozen to preserve it. The slightly digested pineapple in JonBenet's small intestine was professionally analyzed and found to be consistent with the pineapple in the bowl.

BlueCrab

 

[Cranberry]

Was the original container of the pineapple found? Maybe it had other fingerprints on it and that's why all the pineapple was dumped in a bowl?

 

[BlueCrab]

Was the original container of the pineapple found? Maybe it had other fingerprints on it and that's why all the pineapple was dumped in a bowl?

Cranberry,

It was never revealed what the original container from the refrigerator looked like. However, Patsy admitted in the police interviews that she occasionally bought fresh cut-up pineapple from Safeway. If this was the case then the original container would have likely been plastic and, you're right, could have had other figerprints on it.

But please remember that the Lenox China bowl containing the pineapple was very small. Patsy had bought the little bowls to serve salsa in them. Thus, it's doubtful the pineapple was emptied into the little bowl and the large original plastic container thrown away, but it's possible.

BlueCrab